|
Post by Dennis Prouse on Sept 11, 2003 12:29:38 GMT -5
Shiva, the reason why the companies are a little shy about writing policies on brand new homes in certain areas right now is that the province is still in a state of emergency. This morning, the Premier said that the situation is still grave, and the Forests Minister said that it is actually worse than it was four weeks ago. I'm going to assume that these two gentlemen have access to information that is better than mine regarding the fire situation. I realize that everyone would like it to be "business as usual" right now, but the fact remains that it is not. Nonetheless, if you know of anyone who has not been renewed on an existing policy, I'd like to know about it. Wow simply repeats the faux-intellectual argument that somehow insurance is some big scam. (I couldn't really understand what he was trying to say, but he quoted Buckminster Fuller, so it must be right. : We must be the dumbest con artists in the world, however, given that our members' return on equity last year was a whopping 1.8%. That's worse than a Canada Savings Bond, for those scoring at home. Dennis Prouse Insurance Bureau of Canada
|
|
|
Post by Shiva on Sept 11, 2003 13:25:01 GMT -5
Shiva, the reason why the companies are a little shy about writing policies on brand new homes in certain areas OK. Thanks for that bit of info. The insurance arena, industry, business - whatever people are calling it today, is just that - big business and not many really like big businesses, especialy those that can charge what they want, when they want, increasing premiums year after year in what seems like an uncontrolled race for profit. In another post, you said " is that we get hit with these kind of media "drive by shootings". In this one, we were accused of not paying a claim that in fact never existed, and also got to hear a cheap shot questioning our character and motivesI take offense at the Insurance Bureau of Canada escallating simple criticism and comparing it to a drive by shooting. Are you trying to put the Insurance Bureau of Canada in the light of the poor innocent shotup-ee, or reduce the seriousness of drive-bys to that of a sorry reporter's spin on things? Dennis - people, the "public" as we are often called, are smarter than big business and industry give us credit for. We can distinguish between someone reporting the news and a reporter making the news - the latter which we have a lot of in this next of the woods - er left-over woods. The insurance industry should expect some backlash over this. Though the 1.8% wasn't making the rich as richer as they were hoping, they didn't lose and won't - we all know that. You said 1.8% - but of what $10.00? $100.00 - I'm confident the industry didn't suffer - and won't. That aside, we are wall paying for the 9-11, storms in southern US, an airline crash, car crash, house fire, floods, whatever - every time a claim is filed, the cost is added to our premiums. Isn't that a fact? How much of the industry's profit margin is given back to the policy holders in order to reduce their premiums?
|
|
Insurance Accounting
Guest
|
Post by Insurance Accounting on Sept 11, 2003 14:40:13 GMT -5
Bear in mind also, that insurance companies hire a fleet of "account engineers" persons whose sole intent is to manipulate the books. Also, banking and insurance laws being what they are, these guys dont really have the money to pay everyone off anyhow, its fictitious, like the bank of canada act, and controlled by a handful of europeans who dont really give a hoot about "the public"
Dont get fooled by rhetoric from the D.P., he's just putting in his time so he too can ride the spaceship Titanic with Rothschilds, Warburgs, Rockafeller and Mulrooney. Merchant banks and insurance companies had full blown intelligence units, long before british or american navies. He has no choice but to push the party line on this forum, it ringing bells on desk chiefs monitors all over the grid
Dennis was hired cause he looks cute and is a PR guy, a critical thinker on the Ph. D level he is not. Criticism of Buckey is a clear sign of arrogance and disdain for real thinking, a passionate fear.
I predict that we will be using bukeminsterfullerene long after we stop using the insurance industry, which when you think of it is an oxymoron as the Insurance Industry creates nothing, and skims profits. All it creates is advertising and useless occupations...I am sure there are much better ways to collectively support each other, our communities and homes in times of diaster...lets start focusing on those and leave the insurance gun slingers and their obsessive arguments behind.,
|
|
tucker
Junior Member
Posts: 42
|
Post by tucker on Sept 11, 2003 15:11:54 GMT -5
hI everyone. Well I did phone my agent and guess what our ceder fence is covered, also the cleanup costs are covered and our home is replacement value. So we didn't know this and hadn't asked. So I guess the lesson is ask, the ladies in Barriere hadn't they had assumed that it was covered both the fencing and the replacement and for one the cleanup cost, that was wrong. So it's not a standard I guess. I saw on BCTV last nite most people are happy with their insurance agents. So when their finished in Kelowna thenmaybe, they'll do Barriere and Louis Creek. Don't get me wrong i am not mad at Kelowna people, we were there holding my Daughter and Son-in -Law up during the firestorm. It was horrible and I hope no one has to go thru it again. It's just the the people of the North Thompson on a whole are lower income and jobless a lot of them now. It is my understanding that if they want to rebuild that is ok but if they are without work and are thinking of moving to find another job, then they only get a certain amount of monies, not the whole amount as they aren't rebuilding. Oh well just wanted to let you all know. Take care Tucker
|
|
An Actual Insurance Broker
Guest
|
Post by An Actual Insurance Broker on Sept 11, 2003 16:04:13 GMT -5
It's just the the people of the North Thompson on a whole are lower income and jobless a lot of them now. It is my understanding that if they want to rebuild that is ok but if they are without work and are thinking of moving to find another job, then they only get a certain amount of monies, not the whole amount as they aren't rebuilding. Oh well just wanted to let you all know. Take care Tucker Your policy says the same thing, tucker. The "replacement cost" provision of your policy says, basically, that if you choose to rebuild you are entitled to the complete costs of doing so with no deduction for depreciation. This of course is subject to other limiting parameters such as the overall amount of insurance, but the principle is clear. However, if you choose not to rebuild, the insurance policy will provide you, in the form of a lump sum payment, with the Actual Cash Value of the insured property. This, as I said, is standard. Without such a clause, people who lost their homes would be able to rebuild wherever they wanted at the insurer's expense. This creates something referred to as a "moral hazard." Imagine if you were a business person who owned a store or a restaurant, and your business took a hit because a major traffic artery was reduced or rerouted. Less traffic means less visibility means less patrons means less income, right? If his insurance policy gave the business owner the right to rebuild anywhere he wanted, he might become awfully tempted to "accidentally" start a fire to facilitate this. That's the premise behind the condition, and it's perfectly standard. Unfortunately, the Actual Cash Value of most property is a far cry from its replacement cost value, which people sometimes take offense with. There...you see? A perfectly logical answer to a perfectly logical query. This is the sort of thing for which a discussion forum like this can be helpful. See? It can be done. The words of Shiva and wow and this insurance accounting guy are, however, a complete waste of time. They are baseless and inflammatory. These people's minds are already and firmly made up about the insurance industry. They are bent on twisting words, firing hostile accustations, and now personally attacking Mr. Prouse, who is simply here to provide information. Shame on you, Shiva, for suggesting that Dennis was implying that an insurance company receiving a bit of bad press is comparable to the loss of a person's life in a drive-by murder. That's not what he was saying and every intelligent reader here knows it. But twist the words however you want if it makes you feel better. And Accounting Guy, who is the same person as "wow" (one can check of one knows how to do it, you see), you're resorting to arrogant attacks on Dennis's appearance, intelligence and character to emphasize your statements. Good job there, friend. Maybe nobody noticed that your attacks were unnecessary and needlessly malicious. Then again, maybe if you close your eyes, you become invisible. Dennis is here simply trying to help, which is exactly the same reason I made this post, to clarify an issue raised by tucker. However, I don't think Dennis has the time or energy to argue against the baseless rhetoric spewed by the likes of Shive et al. If you're here simply to talk about something while refusing to allowing for the POSSIBILITY of enlightening yourselves, your words are a waste of time to everybody. I know I won't be wasting anymore time on you.
|
|
|
Post by Dennis Prouse on Sept 11, 2003 17:34:53 GMT -5
I should have started an over/under on when the personal attacks might start. (Being called "cute", however, gave me my best laugh of the day. I've been called a lot of things, but that's never been one of them.) Oh well, it's been fun while it lasted. Take care, gang!
Dennis Prouse Insurance Bureau of Canada
|
|
Airfun
Junior Member
Posts: 21
|
Post by Airfun on Sept 11, 2003 19:51:54 GMT -5
Dennis and Insurance Broker I appreciate your info. While often it may seem like a voice of reason doesn't have much efftect, it's the folks who don't say anything that are weighing the information. There are those who would sooner believe the sensational over the reasonable, but that's life:) I've heard insurance stories that make me wary of the industry. Stories from the people involved, they've had to fight to get what they paid for BUT, and this is a big BUT, this isn't the majority - and in ANY industry there are the weasels. I've heard more people speak of some type of damage and because it was covered and went smoothly it's a non-event and doesn't stick in ones head. I'm sure I've plagued my broker with questions for clarification on the "what ifs" over the years, but that's the reason I went with this broker - they answered questions. Hoping truthfully Some answers I didn't want to hear - in the end that does go in their favour. Insurance Broker when I wrote about your posting a while back I do understand where you are coming from. I work in an industry that deals with insurances, I do receive angry calls because many people don't take the time to understand the various insurances that we buy into. But I know I can only vent to my co-workers. In the end I'm lucky because for most of my dealings with clients the call or meeting is ended with a thanks for the info, and they can mitigate their costs, or at least have an understanding of them. There has been a few threats and angry hangups - but very few - those I don't like, but I've done what I can. Knowledge before the fact of loss is best, if one can provide it.
|
|
|
Post by Shiva on Sept 11, 2003 21:05:48 GMT -5
You wrote a lot of really fgood stuff, and I was thinking that you really know a lot until I read the part where you said... Shame on you, Shiva, for suggesting that Dennis was implying that an insurance company receiving a bit of bad press is comparable to the loss of a person's life in a drive-by murder. Re-read it. I never said or implied anything of the sort. Dennis compared the reporters comments to that of a drive-by shooting. I took exception to Dennis making that comparision. THAT'S ALL. I didn't put your industry down. And here, I thought you knew what you were talking about. You blew it.
|
|
|
Post by Ryanesque on Sept 12, 2003 1:59:19 GMT -5
To Shiva... About your comment about insurance companys and drive-by shootings, you said: "I never said or implied anything of the sort." ...and then I look... Are you trying to put the Insurance Bureau of Canada in the light of the poor innocent shotup-ee, or reduce the seriousness of drive-bys to that of a sorry reporter's spin on things? Of course the guy from the insurance bureau wasn't implying that. You were the only one who did. Are you a moron? never mind, forget I asked. When you went on to stupidly deny that your implication, my question just got answered. You ARE a moron......why? because I said so.
|
|
|
Post by South OKer on Sept 12, 2003 23:10:35 GMT -5
Great feed-back you all!!! Dennes, thank you for your response. True enough, not all the facts have been given in that instance, but you always hear of stories of the all-mighty insurance company, and how they always get the last laugh. This whole thread is proof positive that there is two sides to everything. Believe it or not, there will always be the weasel insurance writers, as well as some of the very good ones. We only wish that we get the good one when we need him/her, and the other guy gets the bad ones.At any rate, again...thanksand best wishes to both sides of this debate. It's made very interesting reading!!
|
|
|
Post by ZELLEY on Nov 24, 2004 19:55:13 GMT -5
Airfun joined in August 2003 for the Fire Discussion and only posted 21 messages. Airfun has been silent since this last post, why?
|
|